I am pleased to announce that BoardGameGeek and iOS Board Games will be attending Origins Game Fair 2012. I want to meet with you and will be filming interviews and demos of both physical board games and digital products.
BoardGameGeek has been lucky enough to be selected to participate in a pilot program at Origins 2012. We have been given a table to use as a base of operations in the Origins Game Day Live area of Hall D.
For Publishers and Game Developers:
I will be attending all day Friday and Saturday. I would love to meet with you or have you demo any of your physical games or digital games. All of these video demos will go up on BoardGameGeek.com.
I will be available to visit booths from 10am to 1pm and will be at the BGG table to film demos from 2pm to 6pm.
Please let me know if there a time that works for you. I am also free for after hours meetings
You can PM me here or you can email me at brad@boardgamegeek.com.
For Readers and Friends:
I would love to meet you at Origins. Feel free to come visit the BGG table anytime from 2pm to 6pm on Friday or Saturday. Also after hours it would be great to meet and play games or chat either at the BGG table or in another location.
SIMPLE AND AWESOME This week we take on one of the most critical GM skills, and one of the easiest to get a handle on. That’s because GMs can bring the same excitement and creativity involved in making up characters as players to making up NPCs. Being a GM just allows you the freedom to come up with concepts and play them out almost immediately. I love NPCs and I think one of my strengths is coming up with different and intriguing characters. Sometimes I overdo it- and have too many NPCs, but it is easier to edit or pare away than to have to introduce new characters late in a campaign.
Before I begin with GM advice, I want to start with one piece of player advice regarding memorable NPCs. If you meet an NPC you find interesting in a game, interact with them. Go back and talk with them again. Mention their name. That’s the best signal a GM has that something they’ve done has hooked you. A good GM will clue in and expand that NPC’s presence or role.
READING LIST Some time back I put together a series of posts on the topic of NPCs in games. Consider these supplemental and expanded readings.
As you can see at some point I need to go back and revise those pieces. In today’s article I want to reinforce a couple of key points- simple rules to keep in mind. But I also want to present you with a new tool you can use in NPC creation, one that allows you to maximize prep time.
1. Always Have Names A name is a solid and concrete detail. It shows players that this NPC matters. The sound and color of a name offers atmosphere: ethnicity (Al-Shaghiir, Zenokevitch), tone (Rump-Bonnett, Grishnar), title (Vadshana of the Rift, Duke Forlorn). The easiest way to do this is to hit the various name generator sites and put together a list of names, especially if you can find some theme to them. For example, I put together this list for a standard fantasy campaign. On the other hand, for another campaign, all of the players chose compound names for their characters. So I decided to build most of the example names with compound terms as you can see here. I’ve done the same kind of thing for modern games, for wushu games (using the Exalted name generators), and a number of others. One trick is to find names from certain cultural groups (like Hungarian for example) and then switch around letters or rearrange syllables. You get the sound of the language, but with a strange newness to it. As I use names, I cross them off the list or put an annotation next to them.
There’s a bit of showmanship involved in telling players an NPC’s name. Never let them think that you’re making it up on the fly. That’s a signal that the NPC isn’t important. Refer to your notes, repeat details, describe the person while you’re making the name up. If you make something up unobtrusively make a note of the name for later. I know some GMS theorists dismiss this as “illusionism” but it goes a long way to making an NPC concrete for the players.
2. Desires and Dilemmas NPCs should have motivations. In any conversation between an NPC and a PC, the NPC should have something they want out of that interaction (money, acknowledgement, commitment to a quest, not to be killed, romance, figuring them out, getting home to their family). Take a moment to figure out what that position or desire is. Use that to shape their desires. The NPCs will seem more lifelike. It shouldn’t be done just to block or confuse the players. They don’t have to necessarily figure out that motivation. But it should affect tone and the shape of conversation. It also reminds everyone (including the GM) that these NPCs have lives.
Interesting characters have a gap between their external motivation and their internal desires. That creates a conflict. Often in games with disadvantages, that internal desire might be represented mechanically. It shapes or limits their behaviors. FATE represents those through aspects; these can be compelled to prevent or direct actions. For NPCs who will be sticking around or appearing repeatedly, take time to consider what the gap is between who they present themselves as (or wish to be seen as) and their deeper desires or motives. Over time those NPCs may be faced with a choice between those, creating a dilemma for them. This can reveal character. The reverse is true as well- NPCs can be used to uncover or illustrate the gap between a PC’s external image and internal values.
3. See What Sticks Different players have different tastes. Ideas you think are awesome or interesting will fall flat at the table. The most important thing to remember as a GM: Get over it. You’ll make more. You’ll have other brilliant ideas, interesting plots, cool new monsters, and intriguing NPCs. If something doesn’t work, drop it and move on. With NPCs don’t focus on creating one or two deeply. Create a batch with some details and color, and run them through the grinder. I don’t stat out NPCs. I can do that later or on the fly if I need to. What's more important is figuring out some hooks.
NPCs hit the table and some of them will be acknowledged and then forgotten. Don’t worry about these. Note the names- you might bring them back with changes in their situation or kill them off later. Pay attention to player reactions: do they have one? do they interact with the character? do they ask questions of them? do they clearly hate them? If your players have a significant reaction then the NPCs made an impression. Consider bringkng them back on stage later. A more important signal should be if the players remember/mention the NPC’s name or go back to talk to them later. Even if it purely a question of utility for the players, you’ve establish someone with a significant role. Once you’ve determined that an NPC works or has a hook the group likes, you can work them in more and deepen them. Focus on what seems to be a hit at the table.
4. Secondary to Players This is more a caution. Just as players should love their characters, the GM should love their NPCs. However they should be careful about that. There’s a balance which needs to be maintained. The secret is that NPCs exist in relation to the PCs, but players who behave as if that’s the case come off like sociopaths. But NPCs shouldn’t take the spotlight away from the players. If they’re able to do something expertly, they can put those skills in service for or against the PC group. If they’re overcoming an obstacle in the group’s way, it should be at their behest. Unless you intend them to be enemies or rivals, your NPCs shouldn’t show up the players. Even rivals will need to fall and be overcome. Beware Mary Sue characters.
5. Exercise: An NPC Tool I have a trick for creating NPCs that GMs may find useful. Before campaigns begin, I like to create a batch of NPCs all at once. This activity takes me one or two hours, depending on how creative I’m feeling and how many I want to create. I actually did this yesterday and it took me about an hour to do 22 NPCs. I’ll talk about the mechanics of the system in a moment, but let me try to sell you on the why of it.
NPCs can serve as the best engines and devices for plots and stories. When I start figuring out a campaign, I usually have a general sense of the kinds of stories I want to tell. I might have an idea about the villains or challenges I think the group would enjoy facing. Perhaps I’ve already developed an idea for how we’re going to open. But I’d like to know more about the world, like to come up with more stories and hooks for the players. To do that I can brainstorm NPCs. Each ought to suggest a new story or reveal something about the world. That process serves as half story idea generation and half world-building. And the way I do it is cheap and fast.
A number of years ago I came up with a “tarot” deck unique to my fantasy world. I came up with nine suits of nine cards, plus a wild card. Each had a symbolic name, meanings for upright and reversed positions, and a relation to something from the game world. It was one of those goofy GM exercises where you build something elaborate that isn’t as great or useful for play at the table. Then I hit on a use for it. I was trying to come up with some NPCs for a town the players were going to hit next session. I decided to draw three cards randomly and come up with a story based on that. I did that repeatedly until I had a great set of unique characters. Eventually my wife created an Excel spreadsheet with the cards and meanings, each with a number. I could then easily generate a list of random numbers, use a lookup function, and generate quickly a set of three details. I use my fantasy world’s tarot, but anyone could easily do this by building a sheet with standard tarot meanings or any kind of symbolic set.
The trick is that you have to come up with something based on the elements listed. You can take them as thematic or chronological. It acts as a spur to creative work while limiting options. Let me give you a couple of examples. Yesterday I was going to be running the first session of my new Scion campaign run in Las Vegas- MY PLAYERS SHOULD STOP READING NOW- so I generated some NPCs. I knew the game would take place in Las Vegas, and I knew that the big bad would be Prometheus. I also figured he would have human agents that he “inspired.”
So here’s the first three. I like the joke of the name I put there for the first one--it gives me a sense of what he’s going to be like at the table. He’s a cop, so he’ll be easy to throw into the mix in the game. That second one, well now I’ve come up with a plot for later. Ascendant Bounty Hunters (borrowing from Unknown Armies). Maybe he decides he can gain power by taking down a celebrity bounty hunter, like Dog. Maybe the players get wind of that and have to protect an obnoxious celebrity. The third character’s interesting, more open. He doesn’t immediately spring to mind with stories, but I’m sure I’ll be able to figure something out down the line.
So the PCs will obviously be making a lot of noise in the city. The first character could be used as an ally or agent of an enemy. She could appear after they’ve caused collateral damage. The second one’s great- I can imagine a mystical hoarders junkyard estate. That could be a great scene with someone who perhaps seems crazy but knows too much. The last one’s a nice contrast to Aaron Brokovitch above- another cop who they might cross paths with but who could be bad news.
Here’s the thing, it doesn’t take me long to create these NPCs and already I’ve got new story ideas. I now have a great fallback resource for the campaign. I can pull them out when I need a new idea or I can throw them into the mix right away. I don’t have to tightly plot the game, instead I have elements I can drop into the sandbox. If I don’t use one, no big deal, the effort doesn’t feel wasted.
I just saw this review of the videogame Battleship, based on the movie, which was based on the boardgame. And, before you click on the video below, if you don't know, guess what would be the ONE genre you wouldn't think Battleship would be come. Think for a minute. And now, onto the video (then look below):
Yes Battleship became a FIRST-PERSON SHOOTER!
Did anyone here ever think "First-person shooter" when thinking Battleship? Well, someone did, and actually funded it. Get to sink the Battleship with a SHOTGUN! FTW!
Hikaru No Go happened to get praised as being real good, and served as something that created a world-wide boom in interest in the game of Go. It may be possible that a piece of storytelling can do a good job connected to a game. However, outside of this, and maybe a few others people can mention (feel free to chime below), I would have to ask this: Is it going to be possible to do a good movie based on a game? Good movies based on comic books (Avengers and latest Batman series are two notable) and novels have been done (yes, the typical, "Not as good as the book", is said).
Look at the Rotten Tomatoes (and saw the Spill.com review) of Battleship, and am left wondering if it is possible. You can check out Metacritic.com here on Battleship the movie: http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/battleship/
Anyone believe it is possible? I have serious doubts. You can likely guess why based upon my blog posts on how real games don't have stories, in that games aren't a strong source to directly base a story on. I believe you can do a story on people who play a game (Hikaru No Go is an example of this), but not the game itself.
And I am not sure there will ever be another time in history where a Blog contains both the games Go and Battleship together.
And I am checking the VideoGameGeek box below also, because I a big issue has been that videogames have failed to make a successful transition also. So, I am up to hear from anyone into videogames if they believe a videogame can make a transition. I believe a videogame should be a better candidate for transition to the big screen actually, because of the increased importance on the use of stories in them.
"If a thing is worth doing, it is worth doing badly." (GK Chesterton)
"That's how the light gets in." (Leonard Cohen)
I just finished a game of Civilization V. First time I ever completed a game on King level.
I played as America, on a small Continents map. And as it turned out, I got a small continent all to myself. That never happened before in Civ V; I always seem to get stuck with somebody else--and sometimes I play an Archipelago game instead just to get some breathing space. So, I was happy to have my own continent in this game, even if it was a little one.
Over time, I filled it up with ten cities (including a couple nearby islands). I soon discovered a nearby continent--a big one--occupied by Egypt, Mongolia, Arabia, and India. I let them work things out over there while I peacefully built up my own land.
Later, once caravels started being built, I learned that Germany had gotten a continent to himself as well (either that or he quickly knocked off his nearby competition). And his was huge.
My best efforts to get rich, productive, advanced, or otherwise ahead in points were all in vain. My civilization was just very slow to grow. Other powers were beating me to all the wonders, and I was low man on the totem pole.
Egypt got wiped off the big continent next door, and over time India fell too. Mongolia and Arabia each owned about half the territory for most of the game. They were way ahead of me in points, and Germany was pretty far ahead of them.
I was about ready to throw in the towel. I didn't see much hope of things changing in my favor. I had no military. My economy was in such bad shape that I gave away the two caravels I had built just so I wouldn't have to pay to maintain them. Then I had zero navy.
My social advances went in a weird way too. I started with Liberty, as I usually do. But instead of opening up other areas, I stuck with Liberty till I completed the whole tree. Then I started on Commerce. Fat lot of good that did me; I struggled with a teetering economy until the 1990s or so. Finally, I looked around the map and noticed a dozen city-states. Only one was on my own continent, but since I couldn't get anywhere militarily, I figured I might as well try to influence the city-states. I started working on the Patronage tree, and eventually I completed it. Then I went back and finished the Commerce tree.
The Mongols wiped out Arabia, and at the end of the game they had one big continent; Germany had another; and I had a small continent in between. The Mongols and Germans had both started building spaceships before I developed the capability to even build boosters. And even though the other powers were ahead of me throughout the game, I was forced to keep trading with all of them to keep my people from getting too unhappy. As it was, my unhappiness level reached 10 at times.
It had been a very long, boring game. At least it was peaceful; I never once went to war. But I was isolated and helpless. There wasn't a useful move I could make anywhere.
We were well into the 21st century when I decided my only hope was to build the UN. I checked the tech tree and saw that I'd need Globalization for that, and it'd take me sixteen turns to develop it. I went for it, even though time was running out. I had nothing better to do.
Earlier in the game I had built gardens in two or three cities. I usually don't, as they seem unimportant. But they were quick to build, and something told me they might help. Now I was glad I'd done it, because I figured I'd need a great engineer to finish the UN if I was to have the slightest chance.
So, I got Globalization and started work on the UN in Washington right away. It'd take 26 turns to finish it, and there weren't that many turns left in the game.
Meanwhile, I finally managed to catch up in science, so I started building spaceship parts too. My cities weren't that productive, though, and it was clear I wouldn't be able to complete the ship before time ran out. Still, I switched all my cities to a productivity focus just to do what I could.
With just a few turns left, I had made allies of all the city-states. I had money to burn now that that I had completed the Commerce tree. And the advantages I got from completing the Patronage tree prevented my rivals from making any headway with the neutrals. So, the Mongols just started attacking them. They knocked out Edinburgh and were about to attack Venice. Germany tried undermining me financially, and I had to periodically invest heavily to get an ally back.
Then, miracle of miracles, I got my great engineer.
I had to spend a turn flushing the idle worker unit out of Washington to make way for him, but then I had the engineer hurry production on the UN, and next turn it was built. Now I just had to hang on to my allies and hope for the best.
When the UN vote came up, I checked to make sure I was still allied with all the city-states. I pledged to protect those I hadn't before. Then I voted for myself and sat back to see the results.
I wasn't sure how voting went; I hadn't done it more than a couple times before. I figured Mongolia and Germany would get several votes due to their large territories, so I half expected to lose. But I was wrong; they only got one vote each. And I got one and needed nine; but all eleven of my allied city-states voted for me.
Behind in points all through the game, with no naval units at all and with minutemen still guarding my cities even in the mid-21st century, I had somehow pulled off a victory. Not a great one--only a middling Simon Bolivar level victory--but a triumph nevertheless.
It pays to persist and do what you can--and to make a plan and stick to it--even when it seems all is against you.
I've figured out a better way to keep track of things, so I hope to update this blog a little more often. Please visit these links and give the creators a thumb for their efforts! A huge thanks to
I hope this is his way of saying he's going to spend more time with us! Thank you, VGG.
At 30, I might be a bit too young to really know the Commodore 64, but many have fond memories. It's good to see people who remember that old game music has value too.
Yog-Sothoth knows the gate. Yog-Sothoth is the gate. Yog-Sothoth is the key and guardian of the gate. Past, present, future, all are one in Yog-Sothoth. He knows where the Old Ones broke through of old, and where They shall break through again.
We released Blogs, GeekMail and Tags for testing last week. These systems are where testing and reporting by beta testers would help the most right now. There have been very few reports on those systems. Does that mean they now all work well enough to keep as is when the current site is replaced?
Based on the server stats about 1/10 of the current beta testers have visited the beta site during the last week. If you have a moment, please log in to the beta site, check that Blogs, GeekMail and Tags work ok for you, and then file a report saying the all worked fine. If they did not, please file a report saying what should be improved or what is broken. Please do this for these three systems so we know how many testers are still actively testing the features we put up as the weekly focus. The pace of new systems will start to increase now and we need to know how well-tested they will be.
There is no release this week as we continue testing Blogs, GeekMail and Tags over the weekend. From next week we will do the releases on (mostly) Tuesdays to be better in sync with the development process.
Thanks for helping us release the new site better and sooner!
Here are some highlights and comments on some apps I have been playing this week. I had the chance to play many iOS titles this week:
Ascension: Storm of Souls It is more than likely that most of you are already enjoying Storm of Souls on your iOS devices. This recently added in-app purchase for Ascension: Chronicles of the God Slayer is a great addition and provides an alternative way to play Ascension. Along with this expansion, the latest update to the app also adds a promo pack expansion and several welcome add-ons. Some of these include a next game button in online play and fast app switching.
I think this update is a must have for any fan of Ascension. The added expansions really add a lot of variety to the game and increase the number of ways you can customize the experience. I really enjoy no longer having to load the game each time I go in to play, though the connection to Game Center does seem to take a while (this could be my device). The new cards are interesting to check out and really open up new strategies. The next game button is amazing and has done a lot to ease playing multiple games at a time. The IAP system is actually set up well and restoring purchases is fairly easy. I would check this out if you have not already. You can check the game out here.
Casino by Zeniz Casino games are not something I often try out. I had a stint of really enjoying Texas Hold Em when I was in high school, but not much since then. Casino by Zeniz is basically an online portal to play slots and poker. The poker interface is pretty well done and offers several levels of play. It is easy to hop in and out of a game. The slots, beyond the basic slot game, are somewhat beyond my understanding. It does seem like strong poker simulator and you do start out with credits, so there is no initial investment. I am not sure it is exactly my cup of tea, but if you are up for Texa Hold Em on your iPad it is a well designed option. You can check it out here.
Neuroshima Hex Online The latest update for Neuroshima Hex is just around the corner. I was able to take a look at the update this week and have been quite impressed. The online system is a large improvement over Caylus and Army of Frogs. You start by creating a simple log in and password, it is sad that it is not straight Game Center, but it is not a long process. You can login in to see games that are available to join or start one of your own. Games can be async or real time if both players are online at the same time. There are also are neat options, like the ability to fast forward through the battle scenes like in a single player game. There is also in game chat. This seems like a laundry list of features, but really it is just to show that Neuroshima Hex online appears to be full featured. It really seems like this can be a new async go to. I hope that you all will check out the app when the update launches. I am very pleased. You can check it out here.
Scotland Yard This week Scotland Yard was released from Ravensburger Digital. I have had a chance to play around with it and it is quite well done. You can play with up to six players with local and AI players. There is also online play real time through Game Center. The interface is very well done and captures the game quite well. I will be doing a full review of this next week, but for now it looks like a great game, especially for families. You can check it out here.
City of Secrets: Pipes City of Secrets seems to be becoming something of a franchise and Reiner Knizia appears to be an essential part of it. Much like the previously released Skyline, Pipes is a puzzle game. Each round a series of pipes will be given to you and your task is to connect them to sockets around the edge of a grid in the optimal way. Pipes have large and small connectors. If you connect a larger connector to the outside sockets you score double the point shown, but if you connect a small connector you only score the points shown. You can also score bonus points if you have a chain of large pipes from the center (starting point) to an outside socket. It is a game that rewards preplanning and a little luck (as you don’t which pipes will come when). If you are a fan of these Knizia puzzle games this one is well done. You can get it for $.99 right now.
Draw Something Pics of the Week One picture to post this week from user katamarimanatee, who posted his excellent Monopoly pic a few weeks ago. As always, if you want to share your drawing please submit it to iosboardgames@gmail.com, with your BGG username, and you may see them show up here.
Other
Minecraft Xbox 360 Edition Here is a video review I made this week of Minecraft Xbox 360 Edition:
It seems like more and more “old” video game and board game franchises are being redone or reprinted. A prime example is Diablo III which was released this week. Sometimes these sequels and reboots are improvements but at other times these rehashes can disappoint.
So my question of the week: Should board game and video game companies continue to reprint or sequelize old releases or should they focus on creating new content that learns from the past but is not directly connected to it?
Do games “naturally” fall into three parts as dramas supposedly do?
The classic idea of film and stage play plots is that there are naturally three parts (often called simply Act I, Act II, and Act III rather than use descriptive names). These Acts involve first introducing the protagonist, then introducing the problem or antagonist(s), and finally resolving the conflict and sorting out the aftermath. Wikipedia (accessed 20 May 10) describes it this way:
“A three-act structure is a type of dramatic structure. It includes three broad actions: 1. Setup (of the location and characters) 2. Confrontation (with an obstacle) 3. Resolution (culminating in a climax and a dénouement ).” [the “ever after”, or at least the beginning of it]
This is a structure for dramatic tales, tales of conflict, not necessarily for all kinds of stories. Some people believe the structure is common in games (e.g. see Jeff Tidball’s http://www.escapistmagazine.com/articles/view/issues/issue_1...). (I’m going to use the word “stages” for the rest of the article, if only because plays occur on a stage, though when dramatic structure is not the subject I prefer to use “phase” as in my previous post, explicitly to get away from the idea of dramatic acts or stages.)
Insofar as games sometimes tell dramatic stories and often involve conflict, they may follow this path; but games, especially rules-emergent games, games that don’t explicitly impose a particular story, tell so many different stories that there’s no expectation of three-act structure.
The three-act system has been taught in film schools for many years, but there’s a trend to say “there’s no such thing”– or that it’s five, or nine, acts. Nonetheless, the idea that there are different stages along the way to a dramatic story’s endpoint can be useful to a game designer. While many games are not explicitly stories, there’s always a narrative in the sense of the player being able to say “this is what happened to me when I played this game”.
Games tend to vary over time in what happens, in what the players DO, in the focus of activities. This variance is generally desirable, as it increases the variety in the game and therefore the potential interest and replayability. Arcade-style games going back to Pong and Space Invaders typically have just one stage or phase, with speed increases providing the variability. Further, games that tend to have the same gameplay over time may be more like puzzles than like games (think Tetris or Bejeweled). From my point of view, video games that are trying to tell an explicit story, which includes many of the well-known AAA games because those very expensive games are offering players an “experience”, may follow the three act structure or some variation of it, but most games do not. And dramatic stages don’t always correspond to game phases. Nonetheless, as an exercise in a class I was teaching we tried to list three-part games. These three parts often don’t correspond to the three acts of dramatic structure but I think the result is interesting.
In the end these are more strategic than dramatic stages. Other games have different stages, for example Spore with five parts Britannia with four historical parts. And many shorter games have only one stage.
In many of the games listed above the stages arise out of the nature of the gameplay. Some games have stages ordained by the rules (including order of appearance) rather than by the evolution of play. For Power Grid there are three “steps”, for Britannia there are four phases (Roman conquest and defense, Anglo-Saxon dominance, Vikings, 4 Kings) defined by the reinforcement order of appearance and by “major invasions”. While history usually has an element of drama, there is nothing very dramatic about buying and supplying power stations and cities.
I suspect that three-parts is more common in video games than tabletop games, perhaps because video games more often follow a dramatic story.
Most games are not dominated by an explicit dramatic story, if such a story exists at all in the game. For most game designers, gameplay is more important than story, and the story must conform to the requirements of gameplay. I disagree with Tidball and others, and conclude that games, by and large, are not subject to the classic three dramatic acts, leaving it to others to decide whether films and novels fit the three act form.
One of the biggest (if not THE biggest) releases for PC this year is Diablo III. Released on May 15th, analysts predict the game will sell 3 to 4 million units by the end of year. The game takes place after the events of Diablo II, it is first installment in the series in over 10 years, and has been in development since 2001. The game world is set in the familiar realm of Sanctuary, which was saved over 20 years ago by the events in Diablo II.
Unfortunately for Blizzard, delaying the game for additional polish - as well as a significant beta program - did not prevent launch day problems or deter pre-release controversy.
Launch Day Issues
On launch day, servers were unable to handle the capacity of the customers. Soon the internet became full of "Error 37" memes. In fact, at the time of this writing the first item autofilled in Google's search for the word "error" is the number 37. Considering the amount of people trying to get help with all sorts of errors submitted to the popular search engine everyday, having the number one error search in 2 days is pretty significant.
Continuing along the current trend of gaming, Diablo III requires an internet connection even for single player games. Not having enough server capacity to allow a simple login for players to have a solo game has hurt the image of a company that is well known for its commitment to quality games.
Another point of contention for many gamers is the built-in auction system for game items. Learning from what has happened in World of Warcraft and other MMOs, Blizzard decided to institute a trading house for Diablo III. There are two types of trading houses - one that uses gold from the game and another that uses real world money.
In the gold auction house Blizzard will take 15% from the end price of the item. In the real money version of the auction house Blizzard is taking $1 from items like weapons, armor, etc. Further Blizzard will take 15% of all crafting materials sold for real world money. When users withdraw money they earned in the auction house they will be charged another 15%.
Interestingly enough, Blizzard has put an additional restriction on the game to prevent the gold farming found overseas in past games. The gold only auction house is open to anyone, anywhere. The real money auction house is restricted in the form of only being able to sell to players in their home region. This means that someone from China can't sell you anything in Europe or the Americas.
Successful Launch
Despite its initial controversy and launch day problems, Diablo III has been very well received critically, with a respectable 87 metacritic score. The user score is unreliable as many have chosen to take their frusrations about error 37, and others, out on metacritic by giving it a very low score.
It remains to be seen if Diablo III will captivate people in the same way that Diablo II has done. One thing is for certain - the release issues, DRM requirements, and auction house controversies have not been negatively impacted the company financially. Diablo III has broken the record for amount of pre-sales ordered for a game. The Q2 results are right around the corner and many expect Blizzard Activision to have a record profitable quarter.
